Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
26 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1984–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Florida courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Snelgrove v. Stategreen2 sentences2019Snelgrove v. State, 921 So. 2d 560, 568 (Fla. 2005). 2018Snelgrove v. State, 921 So. 2d 560, 568 (Fla. 2005). | 4 | 4 |
Ruiz v. Stategreen2 sentences2015This Court has explained that “[a] criminal trial is a neutral arena wherein both sides place evidence for the jury’s consideration; the role of counsel in closing argument is to assist the jury in analyzing that evidence, not to obscure the jury’s view with . . . nonrecord evidence.” Ruiz v. State, 743 So. 2d 1, 4 (Fla. 1999) (emphasis supplied). 2015(Emphasis supplied.) The trial court overruled defense counsel’s objection to this comment. - 31 - This Court has explained that “[a] criminal trial is a neutral arena wherein both sides place evidence for the jury’s consideration; the role of counsel in closing argument is to assist the jury in analyzing that evidence, not to obscure the jury’s view with . . . nonrecord evidence.” Ruiz v. State, 743 So. 2d 1, 4 (Fla. 1999) (emphasis supplied). | 2 | 2 |
Fernandez v. Stategreen1 sentence2017See Fernandez, 212 So.3d at 497 . ■ Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded with directions. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Durhamgreen1 sentence2015This Court has explained that “[a] criminal trial is a neutral arena wherein both sides place evidence for the jury’s consideration; the role of counsel in closing argument is to assist the jury in analyzing that evidence, not to obscure the jury’s view with ... nonrecord evidence.” Ruiz v. State, 748 So.2d 1, 4 (Fla.1999) (emphasis supplied). | 1 | 1 |
Alston v. Stategreen1 sentence2013“A trial judge’s ruling on the admissibility of evidence will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion.” Alston v. State, 723 So.2d 148, 156 (Fla.1998). | 1 | 1 |
State v. DiGuiliogreen1 sentence2013See State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986); Mitchell v. State, 118 So.3d 295 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013). | 1 | 1 |
Gosciminski v. Stategreen1 sentence2012See id. at 1024 . | 1 | 1 |
Lubin v. Stategreen1 sentence2007We review denial of a motion for mistrial by an abuse of discretion standard; "a mistrial should only be declared if `the error is so prejudicial and fundamental that it denies the accused a fair trial.'" Lubin v. State, 754 So.2d 141, 143 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Gore v. Stategreen1 sentence2001See id. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Sawyer v. State
green
2 sentences1985Relying on Sawyer v. State, 313 So.2d 680 (Fla. 1975), cert. denied, 428 U.S. 911 , 96 S.Ct. 3226 , 49 L.Ed.2d 1220 (1976), the trial court overruled the defense's objections. 1985Relying on Sawyer v. State, 313 So.2d 680 (Fla.1975), cert. denied, 428 U.S. 911 , 96 S.Ct. 3226 , 49 L.Ed.2d 1220 (1976), the trial court overruled the defense’s objections. | 2 | 1985–1985 |
Pulliam v. Georgia
green
2 sentences1985Relying on Sawyer v. State, 313 So.2d 680 (Fla. 1975), cert. denied, 428 U.S. 911 , 96 S.Ct. 3226 , 49 L.Ed.2d 1220 (1976), the trial court overruled the defense's objections. 1985Relying on Sawyer v. State, 313 So.2d 680 (Fla.1975), cert. denied, 428 U.S. 911 , 96 S.Ct. 3226 , 49 L.Ed.2d 1220 (1976), the trial court overruled the defense’s objections. | 2 | 1985–1985 |
Suggs v. State
green
1 sentence2016After the prosecutor , used the term “diversionary”- one last time, the defense objected, and the trial court asked the attorneys to approach the bench for a sidebar conference. -During the sidebar conference; the trial court' explained that it had overruled the objections because it did not find, after reading the decision in Suggs v. State, 923 So.2d 419 (Fla.2005), that use of the word “diversionary” alone was sufficient to violate, a defendant’s right to a fair trial. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Mims v. State
green
1 sentence2015Id. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Mitchell v. State
green
1 sentence2013See State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986); Mitchell v. State, 118 So.3d 295 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013). | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Smith v. State
green
2 sentences2011Id. 2011Id. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Crawford v. Washington
green
2 sentences2009The certifí-cate reported that a county and statewide search reflected that a contractor’s license had not been issued to anyone named “Randy Washington.” Defense counsel objected to the document’s introduction, arguing that it was hearsay and violated the Sixth Amendment and the principles set forth in Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 , 124 S.Ct. 1354 , 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004), The trial court overruled defense counsel’s objection and that ruling is the subject of the instant appeal. 2009The certifí-cate reported that a county and statewide search reflected that a contractor’s license had not been issued to anyone named “Randy Washington.” Defense counsel objected to the document’s introduction, arguing that it was hearsay and violated the Sixth Amendment and the principles set forth in Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 , 124 S.Ct. 1354 , 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004), The trial court overruled defense counsel’s objection and that ruling is the subject of the instant appeal. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Allen v. United States
green
2 sentences2008In contrast, defense counsel in this case merely asked the court to “tell them about Mr. Allen,” an obvious but super-generalized reference to Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492 , 17 S.Ct. 154 , 41 L.Ed. 528 (1896). 2008In contrast, defense counsel in this case merely asked the court to “tell them about Mr. Allen,” an obvious but super-generalized reference to Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492 , 17 S.Ct. 154 , 41 L.Ed. 528 (1896). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Hitchcock v. State
green
1 sentence2008This ruling was consistent with our direction in Hitchcock V, 673 So.2d at 863 , that "sexual attacks upon persons other than the victim" not be the subject of the State's questions or evidence. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Goodwin v. State
green
1 sentence2008The trial court overruled the defense’s request, [and] noted the objection ...” Goodwin, 717 So.2d at 562 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Dessaure v. State
green
1 sentence2005Dessaure v. State, 891 So.2d 455 , 465 n. 5 (Fla.2004) ("We recognize that the proper standard of review for an overruled defense objection is a harmless error standard."). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Bello v. State
green
1 sentence2001Id. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Blake v. State
green
1 sentence1993The prosecution cited to the trial court the case of Blake v. State, 332 So.2d 676 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976), assuring the trial court that Blake was still "good law." After consideration of Blake , the trial court overruled the defense objection. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Young v. State
green
1 sentence1988This court reversed, finding the Blitch rationale applicable, that is, "that the instruction might have misled the jury by inaccurately appearing to suggest that a killing can never be excusable if committed with a dangerous weapon." 509 So.2d at 1341 . | 1 | 1988–1988 |
West v. State
green
2 sentences1985Excluding persons from the rule of sequestration is within a trial court's discretion, West v. State, 149 Fla. 436 , 6 So.2d 7 (1942), and Stano has demonstrated no abuse of discretion or any prejudice here. 1985Excluding persons from the rule of sequestration is within a trial court's discretion, West v. State, 149 Fla. 436 , 6 So.2d 7 (1942), and Stano has demonstrated no abuse of discretion or any prejudice here. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Morgan v. State
green
1 sentence1984We recently addressed the same issue in Morgan v. State, 415 So.2d 6 (Fla.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 103 S.Ct. 473 , 74 L.Ed.2d 621 (1982). | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Knapp v. Cardwell
green
2 sentences1984We recently addressed the same issue in Morgan v. State, 415 So.2d 6 (Fla.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 103 S.Ct. 473 , 74 L.Ed.2d 621 (1982). 1984We recently addressed the same issue in Morgan v. State, 415 So.2d 6 (Fla.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 103 S.Ct. 473 , 74 L.Ed.2d 621 (1982). | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.